Saturday 22 October 2016

The key arguments from Eva Carneiro and Chelsea

Published 06/06/2016 | 18:36

Former Chelsea first-team doctor Eva Carneiro is claiming constructive dismissal against Chelsea
Former Chelsea first-team doctor Eva Carneiro is claiming constructive dismissal against Chelsea

Former Chelsea first-team doctor Eva Carneiro is claiming constructive dismissal against Chelsea and has a separate, but connected, personal legal action against Jose Mourinho, who left the club in December and is now boss of Manchester United, for alleged victimisation and discrimination.

  • Go To

The case, the focal point of which was when Eden Hazard was treated during the August 8, 2015 match with Swansea, began at Croydon Employment Tribunal on Monday.

Here Press Association Sport looks at some of the points both sides make in their opening arguments.

Good versus bad?

"This is a tale of two employees: one good (Carneiro) and one bad (Mourinho). The bad employee forces the good employee out of the job of her dreams and the employer (Chelsea) does nothing to stop it," the skeleton argument of Carneiro, the claimant, states. "Had she not resigned, she would now be carrying on her duties as first-team doctor," Chelsea say.

£1.2million offer made

Carneiro was offered her job back on more than one occasion, Chelsea say. She asked for a 40 per cent increase to take her salary to £400,000 along with other demands which were not met by the club. The club say she was also offered £1.2m to settle her claims. She declined, leading to the tribunal, which could still be settled at any time.

Future medical director?

Chelsea say Carneiro was identified as a future medical director of the club, but there "were concerns about her willingness to develop her skills in respect of injury diagnosis and rehabilitation". "It is therefore unclear on what basis the claimant contends that Chelsea, and Mr Mourinho in particular, were somehow hostile to the idea of women working in football," the opening remarks for the respondents say.

Profile over progression?

The Blues say she preferred the profile of being first-team doctor. Some of the examples cited of this, made by Chelsea: signing autographs, "seeking to position herself behind Mr Mourinho during televised matches", and "nominating a high-profile first-team player when she uploaded a video to YouTube as part of the 'Ice Bucket Challenge'".

Head injury assessment

Carneiro alleges Mourinho criticised her for the time taken to assess a head injury sustained by Victor Moses in a pre-season friendly with Fiorentina, three days before the Swansea match. Chelsea say the reaction to a previous head injury incident was scrutinised by the media. Mourinho, Carneiro's skeleton argument says, said to the 42-year-old: "Now we're going to s*** ourselves. Every time someone goes down with a head injury we're going to s*** ourselves." Chelsea describe the incident as "unremarkable", adding: "It was Mr Mourinho's style to express himself bluntly."

'Work with the ladies'

Two days after the Swansea flashpoint, Mourinho allegedly told Steve Atkins, head of communications and public affairs at Chelsea, that he did not want Dr Carneiro on the bench the next match, adding: "She works in academy team or ladys (sic) team not with me". Carneiro's legal team also allege that Jon Fearn, the physio whom she followed on to the pitch, was demoted after her.


Chelsea say Mourinho said "filho da puta" (son of a bitch), while Portuguese speaker Carneiro believes she heard him say "filha da puta" (daugher of a whore). Chelsea say it was a general, not targeted, expletive. "The suggestion that these remarks were targeted specifically at the claimant, rather than at both Mr Fearn and her, is opportunistic and unjustified," Chelsea say. Portuguese language experts from either side will appear as witnesses.

No suit

Carneiro claims she experienced a number of issues, including a lack of action by Chelsea following sexually explicit chanting at various away games - in particular at Manchester United and West Ham - and a lack of female changing facilities. She also was not provided with a club suit.

The case continues.

Press Association

Read More

Promoted articles

Editor's Choice

Also in Sport